British Society of Gastroenterology/Joint Advisory Group on GI Endoscopy Delphi method of consensus recommendations for standardised upper gastrointestinal bleeding haemostasis courses

Key Takeaways for GI Nurses

• A national Delphi consensus process has established standardised training and course requirements for upper GI bleeding (UGIB) haemostasis, meaning endoscopy units should expect updated benchmarks for how haemostasis skills are taught and assessed.
• Nurse managers and compliance officers should anticipate the need to review current unit protocols, training pathways, and competency documentation against these new consensus recommendations.
• Endoscopy nurses supporting UGIB procedures—including those assisting with clip application, thermal therapy, or variceal band ligation—may see changes in how staff supporting these lists are trained, credentialed, or required to demonstrate ongoing competency.
• Because this is a regulatory/standards update from BSG/JAG, units may need to align local induction, mentorship, and simulation-based training programmes with the newly agreed national framework to remain compliant with endoscopy accreditation requirements.

Clinical Relevance

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding remains one of the highest-acuity emergencies managed within endoscopy services, and the quality of haemostasis training directly influences patient outcomes, procedural safety, and staff confidence during out-of-hours or emergency lists. This Delphi consensus initiative reflects a recognised need across UK endoscopy services to move away from variable, unit-dependent training toward a standardised, nationally agreed curriculum for haemostasis courses. For nursing staff, this shift matters because much of the operational success of emergency UGIB management depends on well-coordinated teams where nurses understand device preparation, patient positioning, sedation monitoring, and rapid response protocols alongside the endoscopist.

From a unit operations perspective, standardisation of haemostasis training has implications beyond the endoscopist's individual skill set. Nurse managers will likely need to revisit staff training matrices, ensure alignment with updated course content, and confirm that scribing, sedation, and assisting nurses receive parallel education on the standardised haemostasis techniques and equipment being taught to trainees. This may also affect how units document competency for accreditation purposes, particularly where JAG certification and endoscopy unit quality assurance are linked to demonstrable, standardised training pathways rather than informal or locally variable teaching.

For professional development, this consensus offers an opportunity for endoscopy nurses to engage more formally with structured haemostasis education, whether through observing standardised simulation-based training, participating in multidisciplinary human factors training embedded in these courses, or contributing to local audit of how well unit practice matches the new national benchmarks. Given the emergency and often high-stress nature of UGIB cases, embedding consistent language, technique, and team-based protocols across all staff involved—not just physicians—supports safer, faster, and more coordinated patient care during acute bleeding episodes.

Bottom Line

Endoscopy nurses should be aware that national haemostasis training standards for UGIB management are being formalised through BSG/JAG consensus, and unit leaders will need to review and potentially update local training, competency assessment, and team-based emergency protocols to remain aligned with these new regulatory benchmarks—making early engagement with unit compliance discussions a practical next step.